bulletin - chicago herpetological society2).pdf · the bulletin of the chicago herpetological...
TRANSCRIPT
BULLETINof the
Chicago Herpetological Society
Volume 48, Number 2February 2013
The Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society (ISSN0009-3564) is published monthly by the Chicago Herpeto-logical Society, 2430 N. Cannon Drive, Chicago IL 60614.Periodicals postage paid at Chicago IL. Postmaster: Sendaddress changes to: Chicago Herpetological Society, Mem-bership Secretary, 2430 N. Cannon Drive, Chicago IL 60614.
BULLETIN OF THE CHICAGO HERPETOLOGICAL SOCIETYVolume 48, Number 2
Febuary 2013
Notes on Mexican Herpetofauna 19: Herpetofauna Sympatric with Gerrhonotus parvus in San Isidro Canyon, Santiago, Nuevo León,
Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Javier Banda-Leal, David Lazcano and Manuel Nevárez-de los Reyes 13
The Measure of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David G. Barker and Tracy M. Barker 20
Frog City: II. A Trying Guest Arrives Unannounced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ilene Sievert 22
What You Missed at the January Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John Archer 24
Herpetology 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The Tympanum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Curt L. Harbsmeier 29
Unofficial Minutes of the CHS Board Meeting, January 18, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Advertisements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
News and Announcements: 2013 CHS Grant Recipients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Cover: Black-tailed rattlesnake, Crotalus cf. molossus, San Isidro Canyon, Santiago, Nuevo León, Mexico. Photograph by Javier Banda-Leal.
STAFF
Editor: Michael A. Dloogatch --- [email protected]
Advertising Manager: Ralph Shepstone
2012 CHS Board of Directors
Jason Hood, President
Cindy Rampacek, Vice-President
Andy Malawy, Treasurer
Jenny Vollman, Recording Secretary
Stephanie Cappiello, Corresponding Secretary
Aaron LaForge, Publications Secretary
Mike Dloogatch, Membership Secretary
Jim Foster, Sergeant-at-arms
Josh Baity, Member-at-large
Lawrence Huddleston, Member-at-large
Nancy Kloskowski, Member-at-large
Linda Malawy, Member-at-large
The Chicago Herpetological Society is a nonprofit organiza-
tion incorporated under the laws of the state of Illinois. Its
purposes are education, conservation and the advancement
of herpetology. Meetings are announced in this publication,
and are normally held at 7:30 P.M., the last Wednesday of
each month.
Membership in the CHS includes a subscription to the monthly
Bulletin. Annual dues are: Individual Membership, $25.00;
Family Membership, $28.00; Sustaining Membership, $50.00;
Contributing Membership, $100.00; Institutional Membership,
$38.00. Remittance must be made in U.S. funds. Subscribers
outside the U.S. must add $12.00 for postage. Send membership
dues or address changes to: Chicago Herpetological Society,
Membership Secretary, 2430 N. Cannon Drive, Chicago, IL 60614.
Manuscripts published in the Bulletin of the Chicago Herpeto-
logical Society are not peer reviewed. Manuscripts should be
submitted, if possible, on IBM PC-compatible or Macintosh format
diskettes. Alternatively, manuscripts may be submitted in
duplicate, typewritten and double spaced. Manuscripts and letters
concerning editorial business should be sent to: Chicago Herpeto-
logical Society, Publications Secretary, 2430 N. Cannon Drive,
Chicago, IL 60614. Back issues are limited but are available from
the Publications Secretary for $2.50 per issue postpaid.
Visit the CHS home page at <http://www.Chicagoherp.org>.
Copyright © 2013
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):13-19, 2013
Notes on Mexican Herpetofauna 19:Herpetofauna Sympatric with Gerrhonotus parvus
in San Isidro Canyon, Santiago, Nuevo León, Mexico
Javier Banda-Leal, David Lazcano and Manuel Nevárez-de los Reyes
Laboratorio de Herpetología, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León
San Nicolás de los Garza, Apartado Postal 513
C.P. 66450 Nuevo León
MEXICO
Abstract
Gerrhonotus parvus is a species endemic to the state Nuevo León, presently known from
only three localities in the Sierra Madre Oriental, one of which is San Isidro Canyon, located
in the municipality of Santiago, where they have been frequently reported. The objective of
this research was to investigate the herpetological species richness that coexists with
Gerrhonotus parvus. We conducted a literature review that documented the herpetofaunal
species in the municipality of Santiago, Nuevo León, together with several visits to the sites
beginning in 1999 by personnel of the Herpetological Laboratory, Facultad de Ciencias
Biológicas /UANL and a few North American herpetologists. We obtained a total of 43
species. It is worth mentioning that even though it is a relatively small area, it presents a high
diversity in comparison with the rest of the state.
Resumen
Gerrhonotus parvus es una especie endémica del estado de Nuevo León, se conoce
únicamente en tres localidades de la Sierra Madre Oriental, el cañón de San Isidro en
Santiago Nuevo León es el área de donde se han reportado más ejemplares. La intención de
este trabajo es dar a conocer la riqueza de especies de anfibios y reptiles que coexisten con
Gerrhonotus parvus en esta zona, se realizo una revisión de literatura sobre trabajos
realizados con la herpetofauna en el municipio de Santiago Nuevo León, así como de las
visitas que se han realizado desde el año de 1999 por parte del personal del Laboratorio de
Herpetología, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas/UANL y muchos herpetólogos North
Americanos. Esto nos llevo a un total de 43 especies. Cabe mencionar que a pesar de ser un
área relativamente pequeña, presenta una alta diversidad en comparación con el resto del
estado.
Introduction
The family Anguidae comprises four subfamilies: Anguinae,
Anniellinae, Diploglossinae and Gerrhonotinae. Its distribution
is irregular in Europe; anguids also inhabit southern Asia and
the Americas. This family is characterized by the presence of
large body scales with minimal overlap. In addition there is a
presence of adjacent osteoderms on the dorsal and ventral sec-
tion that in most of the anguids are separated by a well defined
deep granular ventrolateral fold. Two genera of the subfamily
Anguinae and the members of Anniellinae lack limbs. In
Gerrhonotinae and Diploglossinae the bodies are elongated and
the limbs are reduced (Pianka and Vitt, 2003; Zug et al., 2001).
Anguids in Mexico are very diverse and include Anniella (2
species), Barisia (7 species), Diploglossus (3 species), Elgaria
(7 species), Gerrhonotus (6 species, with a new species recently
described by Bryson and Graham [2010]), Mesaspis (5 species),
Ophisaurus (2 species) in the checklist of Liner and Casas-
Andreu (2008). Many of these Mexican anguids are ecologically
poorly known. In Nuevo León there are three species: Barisia
ciliaris, Gerrhonotus infernalis and Gerrhonotus parvus. At
some Nuevo León localities all three are sympatric, including
San Isidro Canyon in the municipality of Santiago.
This group of species exhibits two foraging modes: active
foraging (Vitt and Pianka, 1994), and “ambush,” “sit-and-wait”
or “passive foraging” (waiting for prey to come close --- within
the visual field) (Pianka, 1966; Vitt and Price, 1982). Anguids
are often characterized as active foragers, even though the
behavior has been documented from only a few species of this
family (Bryson et al., 2003; Vitt and Congdon, 1978). We are
actively studying anguid behavior in the field and laboratory.
Study Site
The Sierra Madre Oriental is a mountain range which con-
tains numerous valleys and mountains that present widely vary-
ing climatic conditions as well as vegetation types. San Isidro
Canyon is located in what is known as the Curvature of Monter-
rey within the Protected Natural Area known as Parque Cumbres
de Monterrey, Nuevo León, in the municipality of Santiago.
This canyon is located southwest of the municipality and is
contiguous to the south with the state of Coahuila. The canyon
is approximately 2 km in length, at an elevation of 1600 m with
numerous rock walls that are about 400 m in height. It is consti-
13
tuted of limestone, and the walls have elements of desert
rosetófila vegetation: Agave lecheguilla (lechuguilla), Agave
bracteosa (squid agave), and Dasylirium sp. (sotol). The canyon
floor mainly contains submontane elements such as: Helietta
parvifolia (barreta), Chilopsis linearis (desert willow), Cercis
canadensis (eastern redbud), Gochnatia hypoleuca (shrubby
bullseye), Acacia rigidula (blackbrush acacia), Acacia
farnesiana (sweet acacia), Acacia berlandieri (Berlandier’s
acacia) and several oak species Quercus sp.. There is a gallery
forest with a distinguishing element, Platanus occidentalis
(American sycamore), throughout the canyon. There is almost
always water flowing, but in the dry season the water flow may
be intermittent. In branch canyons small pools may form. We
have found several of our specimens, including a neonate, in
these branch canyons.
Materials and Methods
The list of herpetofauna sympatric with Gerrhonotus parvus
was based on literature records for the municipality of Santiago,
Nuevo León, as well as visits to the area. Since 1999 the au-
thors, from the Laboratory of Herpetology of the Faculty of
Biological Sciences of the UANL, and other herpetologists,
mainly North American, have visited the canyon about four or
five times per year, monitoring species of the area. It is illegal to
collect animals in the canyon without a scientific permit issued
by our Mexican federal authorities.
Results
During these field trips we found several pygmy alligator
lizards. They were found under dead plant matter and in crevices
or active on the canyon floor close to the walls.
A small number of publications (13) were found that deal
with the herpetofauna of the area:
• Treviño (1978) studied the distribution of herpetofauna in
southern Nuevo León and reported several species present in
San Isidro Canyon, although he did not collect in the canyon
itself, but in nearby areas. The information is part of his bache-
lor’s thesis.
• Bezy (1984) carried out a study on the systematics of the genus
Lepidophyma in the northeast of Mexico, in which he reports
various specimens for the municipality of Santiago, one in the
area of Presa la Boca, (one of the superficial water supplies for
the Monterrey metropolitan area), the others from Las Adjuntas
in Parque Nacional Cumbres de Monterrey, approximately 19
km in a straight line from San Isidro Canyon.
• Smith (1986) proposed a taxonomic change of Gerrhonotus
parvus to Elgaria parva based on similarity of the scalation of
the head with this genus.
• Benavides-Ruiz (1987) compiled a list of the herpetofauna of
the southern part of the municipality of Santiago. From one of
her localities near the Sierra of San Isidro, she reports species
also present in San Isidro Canyon. She did not find Gerrhonotus
parvus. The information is part of her bachelor’s thesis.
• Wiens et al. (1999) reviewed the taxonomic status of popula-
tions of the Sceloporus jarrovii complex and assigned the popu-
lations from northeastern Mexico to two species, Sceloporus
minor and Sceloporus oberon. Using some specimens from
Laguna de Sanchez and San Isidro, they assigned Sceloporus
oberon to the area.
• Banda-Leal (2002) conducted a herpetofaunal study of Parque
Ecológico de Chipinque in which he reports most of the species
known from San Isidro Canyon, with exception of Gerrhonotus
parvus. The information is part of his bachelor’s thesis.
• Banda-Leal et al. (2002) documented a new locality for
Gerrhonotus parvus (as Elgaria parva) in San Isidro Canyon.
They discussed the morphology and taxonomic rank of the
species and provided a description of the habitat that differs
Study site area: San Isidro Canyon, Santiago, Nuevo León, Mexico.
Floor of the one of the branch canyons. Photograph by Javier Banda-Leal.
Pools of water sometimes form in the branch canyons. Photograph byJavier Banda-Leal.
14
A red-spotted toad, Anaxyrus punctatus from one of the branchcanyons. Photograph bt Javier Banda-Leal. A Nuevo León graceful brownsnake, Rhadinea montana, from the
canyon. Photograph by Robert Hansen.
A marked male pygmy alligator lizard, Gerrhonotus parvus, from one ofthe branch canyons. Photograph by Javier Banda-Leal.
A male Couch’s spiny lizard, Sceloporus couchii. Photograph by JavierBanda-Leal.
A male black-tailed rattlesnake, Crotalus cf. molossus, from one of thebranch canyons. Photograph by Javier Banda-Leal.
A juvenile Sceloporus oberon. Photograph by Javier Banda-Leal.
15
significantly from the type locality in Galeana, Nuevo León. San
Isidro is a limestone canyon at an elevation of 1600 m. The
specimen was found on the floor of the canyon beside a wall,
with decomposing organic matter as a substrate.
• Bryson et al. (2003) documented several natural history as-
pects of Gerrhonotus parvus at the type locality and at San
Isidro Canyon, along with some sympatric herpetological spe-
cies in both areas.
• Banda et al. (2005) documented the largest known specimen of
Gerrhonotus parvus, which was from San Isidro Canyon. The
specimen, which had a complete tail, measured 76.5 mm in total
length, exceeding the next largest known by 4.4 mm. This large
specimen was found in the month of May at the base of a branch
canyon, at a time when the branch canyon was flooded. The
specimen unfortunately had died, apparently drowned. Lizards
in the branch canyons are at risk due to flooding and the forma-
tion of deep ponds. Before this a paratype from Galeana was the
largest specimen reported (Knight and Scudday, 1985). It was
maintained in captivity for about 5 years and was deposited in
the collection at the Sull Ross University.
• Conroy et al. (2005) used Bayesian analysis of DNA sequences
to determine the phylogenetic position of Elgaria parva, locat-
ing it as the sister species to Gerrhonotus infernalis. Thus, they
proposed placing it in the genus Gerrhonotus (rather than
Elgaria as originally described by Knight and Scudday [1985]).
• Lazcano and Bryson (2010) registered a young Gerrhonotus
parvus for the first time, from San Isidro Canyon. The specimen
described had a complete tail and its coloration was very differ-
ent from the adults, consisting of sharply defined dark bands.
Although the adults also have bands, they are not so dark and do
not contrast sharply with the ground color. The young are very
different from those of the sympatric Gerrhonotus infernalis,
which are very similar to adults of the species.
• Dixon et al. (2011) reviewed three species of Rhadinaea found
in the Sierra Madre Oriental of Mexico, including specimens of
Rhadinaea montana from the mountains of Santiago, Nuevo León,
and San Isidro Canyon, sympatric with Gerrhonotus parvus.
• Narváez-Torres (2012) conducted a study of the herpetofaunal
composition of the natural protected area Parque Nacional
Cumbres de Monterrey which included San Isidro Canyon. He
did not find the endemic species Gerrhonotus parvus.
We have found a number of species sympatric to the pygmy
alligator lizard in San Isidro Canyon: Anaxyrus punctatus (red-
spotted toad); Ollotis nebulifer (Gulf Coast toad); Eleuthero-
dactylus cystignathoides campi (Rio Grande chirping frog);
Eleutherodactylus longipes (long-footed chirping frog); Ecno-
miohyla miotympanum (small-eared treefrog; Smilisca baudinii
(Mexican treefrog); Scaphiopus couchii (Couch`s spadefoot);
Gerrhonotus infernalis (Texas alligator lizard) which has a wide
distribution in Texas and northern Mexico; Sceloporus couchii
(Couch’s spiny lizard); Sceloporus grammicus disparilis (north-
eastern graphic lizard); Sceloporus oberon (royal lesser minor
lizard); Sceloporus parvus (northern blue-bellied lizard);
Sceloporus torquatus binocularis (Nuevo León torquate lizard);
Plestiodon brevirostris pineus (pine woods short-nosed skink);
Scincella silvicola caudaequinae (Horsetail Falls ground skink);
Aspidocelis scalaris gularis (Texas spotted whiptail); Coluber
constrictor oaxaca (Mexican racer); Coluber schotti ruthveni
(Ruthven’s whipsnake); Coluber flagellum testaceus (western
coachwhip); Lampropeltis mexicana mexicana (San Luis Potosí
kingsnake); Pantherophis bairdi (Baird’s ratsnake); Pituophis
deppei jani (northern Mexican pinesnake); Rhinocheilus
lecontei (long-nosed snake); Rhadinaea montana (Nuevo León
graceful brown snake); Salvadora grahamiae lineata (Texas
patch-nosed snake); Thamnophis proximus diabolicus (arid land
ribbonsnake); Crotalus atrox (western diamondback rattle-
snake); Crotalus cf. molossus (black-tailed rattlesnake) and
Crotalus lepidus lepidus (mottled rock rattlesnake).
Collected specimens were identified using criteria estab-
lished by Smith and Taylor (1945, 1948, 1950), Conant and
Collins (1998), and the Catalogue of American Reptiles and
Amphibians. The phrynosomatids we collected were identified
using keys for species from Nuevo León and Tamaulipas con-
structed by Hobart Smith. Scientific and common names were
updated using Liner and Casas-Andreu (2008).
Discussion and Conclusions
The herpetological richness of the state of Nuevo León
accounts for a total of -136 species (110 reptiles and 26 am-
phibians). The 44 species (37 reptiles and 7 amphibians) on our
list for San Isidro Canyon (see Table 1) represent 32.35% of the
total herpetofauna of the state.
Some of these species on the list are potential predators of
Gerrhonotus parvus. For example, we found a rock rattlesnake
that had predated a juvenile Sceloporus oberon on the road in
San Isidro Canyon toward Laguna de Sanchez (Lazcano et al.,
2004). And as Gerrhonotus infernalis is a sympatric species and
very aggressive it could easily predate the much smaller G. parvus.
With more field trips the herpetological list could grow
easily. This is an excellent place to do continual monitoring of
amphibians and reptiles. At the moment we have a doctoral
degree thesis project underway on the ecology and phylogeny of
the species in the canyon.
Alamo Canyon, a parallel canyon to San Isidro, has not been
explored herpetologically. Access to Alamo Canyon is by dirt
road, not paved like San Isidro. No doubt Gerrhonotus parvus
and many of the sympatric species are there.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the multiple national and interna-
tional institutions that supplied their collection data for this
specific area, allowing us to update the herpetofauna for the
Sierras of Nuevo León; the Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo
León, for financial support of this study; the SEMARNAT for
issuing collecting permits and providing the most recent ones:
Oficio Num. SGPA/DGVS/0511/12 and Oficio Num. SGPA/
DGVS/07101/12. We would also like to thank all the persons
who participated in lab and field work, in particular Dr. James
R. Dixon, Dr. Robert W. Bryson, Jr., and Dr. Robert L. Bezy
for going over the manuscript and the authorities of Parque
Nacional Cumbres de Monterrey.
16
Table 1. Amphibian and reptile species from the area of San Isidro Canyon, based on literature reports and specimens in preserved collections. Status =
protection status in the Mexican NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010: A = Amenazada (Threatened); Pr = Protección Especial (Special Protection); SE = Sin
Estatus (No Status). Observed = species seen during the course of this study. Common and scientific names follow Liner and Casas-Andreu (2008).
Taxon Common Name Status Observed
Amphibia: Anura
Family Bufonidae
(1) Anaxyrus punctatus (Baird and Girard, 1852) Red-spotted Toad SE X
(2) Ollotis nebulifer (Girard, 1854) Gulf Coast Toad SE X
Family Eleutherodactylidae
(3) Eleutherodactylus cystignathoides campi (Stejneger, 1915) Spotted Chirping Frog SE X
(4) Eleutherodactylus longipes (Baird, in Emory, 1869) Long-footed Chirping Frog SE X
Family Hylidae
(5) Ecnomiohyla miotympanum (Cope, 1863) Small-eared Treefrog SE X
(6) Smilisca baudinii (A. M. C. Duméril and Bibron, 1841) Mexican Treefrog SE X
Family Scaphiopodidae
(7) Scaphiopus couchii Baird, 1854 Couch`s Spadefoot SE X
Reptilia: Squamata ---Lizards
Family Anguidae
(8) Barisia ciliaris (H. M. Smith, 1942) Northern Alligator Lizard Pr X
(9) Gerrhonotus infernalis Baird, 1859 (1858) Texas Alligator Lizard SE X
(10) Gerrhonotus parvus Knight and Scudday, 1985 Pigmy Alligator Lizard Pr X
Family Phrynosomatidae
(11) Sceloporus couchii Baird, 1859 (1858) Couch’s Spiny Lizard SE X
(12) Sceloporus grammicus disparilis Stejneger, 1916 Northeastern Graphic Lizard Pr X
(13) Sceloporus oberon H. M. Smith and B. C. Brown, 1941 Royal Lesser Minor Lizard SE X
(14) Sceloporus parvus H. M. Smith, 1934 Northern Blue-bellied Lizard SE X
(15) Sceloporus torquatus binocularis Dunn, 1936 Nuevo Leon Torquate Lizard SE X
Family Scincidae
(16) Plestiodon brevirostris pineus (R. W. Axtell, 1960) Pine Woods Short-nose Skink SE X
(17) Scincella silvicola caudaequinae (H. M. Smith, 1950) Horsetail Falls Ground Skink A X
Family Teiidae
(18) Aspidocelis scalaris gularis (Baird and Girard, 1852) Texas Spotted Whiptail SE X
Family Xantusiidae
(19) Lepidophyma sylvaticum E. H.Taylor, 1939 Madrean Tropical Night Lizard Pr
Reptilia: Squamata --- Snakes
Family Colubridae
(20) Coluber constrictor oaxaca (Jan, 1863) Mexican Racer A X
(21) Coluber flagellum testaceus Say, in James, 1823 Western Coachwhip A X
(22) Coluber schotti ruthveni (Ortenburger,1923) Ruthven’s Whipsnake SE X
(23) Drymarchon melanurus erebennus (Cope,1860) Texas Indigo Snake SE
(24) Drymobius margaritiferus margaritiferus (Schlegel, 1837) Northern Speckled Racer SE
(25) Hypsiglena jani texana Stejneger,1893 Texas Nightsnake Pr
(26) Lampropeltis mexicana mexicana (Garman, 1884 [1883]) San Luis Potosí Kingsnake A X
(27) Leptodeira septentrionalis (Kennicott, in Baird, 1859) Northern Cat-eyed Snake SE
(28) Opheodrys aestivus majalis (Baird and Girard, 1853) Western Rough Greensnake SE
(29) Pantherophis bairdi (Yarrow, in Cope, 1880) Baird’s Ratsnake SE X
(30) Pituophis deppei jani (Cope, 1861 [1860]) Northern Mexican Pinesnake A X
(31) Rhadinaea montana H. M. Smith, 1944 Nuevo Leon Graceful Brown Snake Pr X
(32) Rhinocheilus lecontei Baird and Girard, 1853 Long-nosed Snake SE X
17
Table 1 (cont’d).
Taxon Common Name Status Observed
(33) Salvadora grahamiae lineata Schmidt, 1940 Texas Patch-nosed Snake SE X
(34) Senticolis triaspis intermedia (Boettger, 1883) Northern Green Ratsnake SE
(35) Storeria hidalgoensis E. H. Taylor, 1942 Mexican Yellow-bellied Brownsnake SE
(36) Tantilla rubra Cope, 1876 (1875) Red Black-headed Snake Pr
(37) Thamnophis cyrtopsis cyrtopsis (Kennicott, 1860) Western Black-necked Gartersnake SE
(38) Thamnophis proximus diabolicus Rossman, 1963 Arid Land Ribbonsnake A X
(39) Trimorphodon tau tau Cope, 1870 Mexican Lyresnake SE
(40) Tropidodipsas sartorii sartorii Cope,1863 Sartori`s Snail Sucker Pr
Family Crotalidae
(41) Crotalus atrox Baird and Girard, 1853 Western Diamondback Rattlesnake Pr X
(42) Crotalus lepidus lepidus (Kennicott, 1861) Mottled Rock Rattlesnake Pr X
(43) Crotalus cf. molossus Black-tailed Rattlesnake Pr X
Family Elapidae
(44) Micrurus tener (Baird and Girard, 1853) Texas Coral Snake Pr
Literature Cited
Banda, J., R. W. Bryson, Jr, and D. Lazcano. 2005. Gerrhonotus parvus (Pygmy Alligator Lizard). Maximum size. Herpetological Review
36(4):449.
Banda-Leal, J. 2002. Aspectos ecológicos de la herpetofauna del Parque Ecológico Chipinque, ubicado en los municipios de Garza García y
Monterrey, Nuevo León, México. Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Unpublished thesis. 90 pp.
Banda-Leal, J., R. W. Bryson, Jr., and D. Lazcano Villareal. 2002. New record of Elgaria parva (Lacertilia: Anguidae) from Nuevo León,
México. The Southwestern Naturalist 47(4):614-615.
Benavides-Ruiz, R. 1987. Herpetofauna del centro sur del municipio de Santiago, Nuevo León, México. Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas,
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Unpublished thesis. 59 pp
Bezy R. L. 1984. Systematics of xantusiid lizards of the genus Lepidophyma in northeastern México. Nat. Hist. Mus. of Los Angeles
County, Contributions in Science (349):1-16.
Bryson, R. W., Jr., and M. R. Graham. 2010. A new alligator lizard from northeastern Mexico. Herpetologica 66 (1):92-98.
Bryson, R. W., Jr., D. Lazcano, J. Banda, C. García-de la Peña and G. Castañeda. 2003. Historia natural de la lagartija pigmea (Elgaria
parva) endémica de Nuevo León, México. Boletín de la Sociedad Herpetológica Mexicana 11(1):21-22.
Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1998. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians of eastern and central North America. Third edition,
expanded. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Conroy, C. J., W. R. Bryson, Jr., D. Lazcano and A. Knight. 2005. Phylogenetic placement of the Pygmy Alligator Lizard based on
mitochondrial DNA. J. Herpetology 39(1):142-147.
Dixon, J. R., D. Lazcano, J. Banda-Leal and J. A. Chávez-Cisneros. 2011. Notes on Mexican herpetofauna 17: The status of Rhadinaea
montana, R. gaigeae and R. quinquelineata of the Sierra Madre Oriental of eastern Mexico. Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 46(6):69-73.
Knight, R. A., and J. F. Scudday. 1985. A new Gerrhonotus (Lacertilia: Anguidae) from the Sierra Madre Oriental, Nuevo León, Mexico.
The Southwestern Naturalist 30 (1):89-94.
Lazcano, D., J. Banda Leal, G. Castañeda G., C. García de la Peña and W. R. Bryson, Jr. 2004. Crotalus lepidus (Rock Rattlesnake). Diet.
Herpetological Review 35(1):62-63.
Lazcano, D., and R. W. Bryson, Jr. 2010. Gerrhonotus parvus (Pygmy Alligator Lizard). Juvenile size. Herpetological Review 41(1):79.
Liner, E. A., and G. Casas-Andreu. 2008. Nombres estándar en Español en Ingles y nombres científicos de los anfibios y reptiles de
México. / Standard Spanish, English and scientific names of amphibians and reptiles of Mexico. Second edition. Society for the Study of
Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 38.
Narváez-Torres, S. 2012. Distribución ecológica de la herpetofauna del Parque Nacional Cumbres de Monterrey, Nuevo León, México.
Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Unpublished thesis 140 pp.
Pianka, E. R. 1966. Convexity, desert lizards, and spatial heterogeneity. Ecology 47:1055-1059.
18
Pianka, E. R. and L. J. Vitt. 2003. Lizards: Windows to the evolution of diversity. University of California Press. Pp. 227-238.
Smith, H. M. 1986. The generic allocation of two species of Mexican anguid lizards. Bull. Maryland Herp. Soc. 22:21-22.
Smith, H. M., and E. H. Taylor. 1945. An annotated checklist and key to the snakes of Mexico. Bulletin of the United States National
Museum (187).
Smith, H. M., and E. H. Taylor. 1948. An annotated checklist and key to the amphibia of Mexico. Bulletin of the United States National
.Museum (194)
Smith, H. M., and E. H. Taylor. 1950. An annotated checklist and key to the reptiles of Mexico exclusive of the snakes. Bulletin of the
United States National Museum (199).
Smith, H. and E. Taylor. 1966. Herpetology of Mexico, Annotated Checklists and Keys to Amphibians and Reptiles. Reimpresion de Bol.
187, 194, 199; U.S. Natural Museum Ashton, Maryland, Eric Lundberg, 239: 118, 253.
Treviño, C. H. 1978. Estudio herpetofaunístico distribucional del sur de Nuevo León, México, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas,
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Unpublished thesis. 63 pp.
Vitt, L. J., and J. D. Congdon. 1978. Body shape, reproductive effort, and relative clutch mass in lizards: Resolution of a paradox.
American Naturalist 112:595-608.
Vitt, L. J., and E. R. Pianka. 1994. Lizard ecology: Historical and experimental perspectives. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University
Press.
Vitt, L. J., and H. J. Price. 1982. Ecological and evolutionary determinants of relative clutch mass in lizards. Herpetologica 38(1):237-255.
Wiens, J. J., W. T. Reeder and A. Nieto-Montes de Oca. 1999. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution of sexual dichromatism among
populations of Yarrow’s spiny lizard (Sceloporus jarrovii). Evolution 53(6):1884-1897.
Zug, G. R., L. J. Vitt and J. P. Caldwell. 2001. Herpetology: An introductory biology of amphibians and reptiles. Second edition.
Pp. 595-598. San Diego and London: Academic Press.
19
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):20-21, 2013
The Measure of Experience
David G. Barker and Tracy M. Barker
Growing up as snake lovers some decades ago, we and our
fellow snake fanatics knew who the experts were. They were the
few people with whom we had any sort of contact who had
experience. Now this was not a large number of people. Even
counting the authors of the few reptile books that we managed to
find in the library, there weren’t many experts.
“Experience” to us meant access to snakes. You couldn’t get
experience if you didn’t have snakes. But it wasn’t easy to get
snakes back then. Even local snakes were a challenge to acquire.
There were no publications in our local libraries that detailed
how to collect snakes.
Of course, in those days, as in many places today, the local
people were convinced that snakes were everywhere. When
asked, they would just sort of point to the brushiest spot and
wave a hand and declare that “right over there is full of them!”
Sadly, we never found that place to which they referred.
Not that many years ago, the pursuit of a snake hobby was a
rather isolating lifestyle. In some extreme cases it actually pro-
duced hermits, people whose greatest fear was that their neigh-
bors might find out what was in their basement. That wasn’t
because snake keeping was an illegal hobby back then. There
were few city ordinances that specified forbidden sizes or spe-
cies within municipal boundaries. No, the reason was that snake
keepers didn’t want everyone in the neighborhood to think they
were odd.
It was lonely back then for most of us.
There were no color glossy magazines. There was no classi-
fied advertising for reptiles. Most of us growing up in small-
town America didn’t have access to, much less membership in,
regional herpetological societies. There were no weekend snake
sales. There were precious few books, and there were hardly any
pictures in the few books that we could find in public libraries.
It was rare that any pet store would have a snake on display. We
couldn’t have even imagined the possibility that someday there
would be an Internet with reptile sites that pulled in tens of
thousands of visitors every month.
This wasn’t very long ago.
Of course, back then there existed many wholesale animal
businesses that annually imported hundreds of thousands of
snakes, other reptiles, mammals, and birds into the U.S. Most of
these importers were in Florida, although they existed also in
New York and Philadelphia, Texas and California. But these
businesses mostly supplied the pet stores in the largest cities,
and very few imports trickled out to the mom-and-pop pet shops
in Middle America. These reptile wholesalers mailed out
monthly price lists featuring items like “boa constrictors at
$4.00/foot” or “horny toads for $0.60 each.” But we never even
suspected they existed because what also existed then were
secrets.
As hard as this may be to believe, snake people actually kept
snake secrets from other snake people. When we were starting
out, the few herpers we knew and the few pet stores we haunted
would never have considered giving us access to the names and
addresses of reptile importers or wholesale businesses. For that
matter, most snake keepers wouldn’t divulge the maintenance
and breeding secrets that they had independently discovered.
There were lots of secrets that we the underlings would have to
strive to uncover for ourselves.
Today, however, secrets are hard to keep, the snake business
has changed, and most keepers have easy access to an incredible
variety of snakes.
Now, entering the second decade of the 21st century, an
overwhelming amount of information about reptiles is published
and readily available. Young keepers can’t comprehend what a
recent turn of events this is. There are now so many books, mag-
azines, newsletters and websites that it would be nearly impossi-
ble to read and absorb all the existing information about snakes.
And this is the problem. With so many authors promoted as
“experts,” how in the world can young keepers know who the
real experts are? In whose information should they place their
trust?
It’s our observation that a new class of “experts” has prolif-
erated, one comprised mostly of well-read, snake-loving people
with strong interests and a few snakes. Some of these would-be
experts have read and memorized every printed word written
about some particular species. They are veritable walking ency-
clopedias --- but with only one or two entries. We have met
people who can quote passages from some of the old articles we
wrote for Vivarium magazine as if they were Scripture.
And, of course, contributing to the creation of this new class
of experts is the realization by publishers that snake books sell,
and snake magazines sell. There are publishers who comb
herpetoculture looking for wanna-be authors, people willing to
write on some subject that the market research team at the pub-
lishing house has decided will sell. The result has been a flood
of publications that, frankly, aren’t worth a damn.
Much of what has been written in the past 20 years or so was
authored by people with insignificant amounts of experience with
the particular animals that were the topics. Then these manuscripts
were edited by people with no clue about herpetoculture. They
rehash and reinterpret older published information, and all too
often they repeat misinformation handed down to us from previ-
ous generations who were writing when herpetoculture was so
young that it was diapered by Ditmars. Much of what is pub-
lished on the general topic of herpetoculture today can be de-
scribed only as poor and not founded in significant experience.
So who are the true experts and how do we identify them?
The experts of herpetoculture today are the people with exten-
sive experience with animals, the same as when we were grow-
ing up. Herpetoculture is a hands-on activity, not a cerebral
exercise. To develop expertise requires time and it requires
20
hand-on experience. There is no substitute.
For this reason, we propose an actual measure of experience:
the “snake-year.” A keeper achieves one snake-year of experi-
ence by maintaining one snake for one full year. If a keeper
keeps ten snakes for ten years, he or she then has accumulated
100 snake-years of experience. Of course, for lizard people there
is the “lizard-year,” and turtle people have “turtle-years.” The
snake year is a quantitative measure of experience. It is a means
by which a keeper can personally measure his lifetime experi-
ence, evaluate the experience of other keepers, and measure the
merit of information and advice presented by the tidal wave of
pseudoexperts with which we recently have been deluged.
This type of measurement is used by falconers as a gauge of
devotion and expertise. For those of you who have not been
exposed to falconers, they are the only other group of animal
people who just might possibly love their animals with a passion
equal to that encountered in the snake world. There are different
recognized degrees of falconry based on experience, all the way
up to lofty Master Falconer. Different federal falconry permits
are required for each level, each granting access to different
falcons, hawks, and eagles. For example, a beginning falconer
cannot keep a peregrine falcon or gyrfalcon. Perhaps a begin-
ning snake keeper should not keep a reticulated python or spit-
ting cobra.
Of course, it’s possible that someone with a lot of snake-
years may have learned little, done a miserable job as a keeper,
and killed multitudes of snakes. Certainly there are animal
importers who have had thousands of full cages of reptiles for
dozens of years; most of these people are truly experts at what
they do, but there have been a few that were grossly incompe-
tent, able to stay in the business only because of the short time
they maintained any animal. In the animal business in general, if
people continue working with animals, they gain experience and
eventually gain expertise.
Today there are giants of herpetoculture living among us,
many of whom are unrecognized by most keepers. These are
people with whom one can spend an afternoon talking at a snake
show where they are sitting behind their tables. These are the
keepers with thousands of snake-years, a degree of experience
that in the future may never be equaled. An amazing number of
these people are modest snake folk who remain quiet in a crowd
while some 15-year-old “expert” with only three snake-years
loudly pontificates about how to keep ball pythons or spotted
pythons.
Consider, there may be herpetological prodigies, but there
are no young herpetocultural experts.
How much experience is a lot of experience? Well, there are
quite a number of keepers with 1,000 snake-years, obtained by
keeping 100 snakes for 10 years or 50 snakes for 20 years. Even
500 snake-years of experience amounts to a very respectable
career with snakes, certainly qualifying one as an expert. Today
there are several dozen active keepers with more than 5,000
snake-years of experience. And there are a few keepers among
us with more than 10,000 snake-years of experience, some of
whom are still keeping snakes!
Unfortunately, many of herpetoculture’s greatest experts
have not documented their hard-accumulated wealth of knowl-
edge. Some of them are already dead, and many of the rest will
disappear almost without a trace. But while they may receive
little notice or credit from future generations of snake keepers
for the collective body of knowledge generated by their experi-
ence, they will have contributed. They will leave behind to the
current generation their conversations on the telephone, their
shop talk around the beer kegs, their input to panel discussions
at annual herpetological meetings, their discussions across the
table at weekend reptile shows. Some of their stories may be-
come part of the myth and lore of our world. They will leave
behind their trainees and interns who cleaned cages for the fun
of it, the kids they have inspired, and in some cases, the keepers
they directly taught to keep snakes. In herpetoculture, we build
on the experience of the experts who came before us. Just by
doing what they love to do, they will have contributed.
We snake people need to be more aware of the varying levels
of experience around us in the snake world. Experience does
count. Often it makes the difference between life and death, both
for the keeper and the kept. It only takes a lot of money to amass
a large collection of snakes, but it takes devotion and expertise
to keep a large collection of snakes for years. Perhaps it is time
that herpetoculture follow the example of falconry. It’s easiest
for the government to take away everyone’s right to maintain
venomous and large snake species if we keepers have no bona
fide, recognized experts, and if we have no level of Master
Snake Keeper to which young keepers can aspire.
Today some of the greatest experts of herpetoculture are
living among us, many of them still off in their little worlds
cleaning cages. We need to acknowledge their devotion and
experience. We need to acknowledge the unit of a snake-year as
a valid and necessary means to measure experience and, by
extension, expertise. We need to know our experts.
21
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):22-23, 2013
In fond remembrance of Ilene Sievert, who died December 16, 2012, this year we will reprint several of the essays that Ilene
wrote for these pages between 1988 and 1993 under the rubric “Frog City.” This one is from July 1988.
Frog City
by Ilene Sievert
II. A Trying Guest Arrives Unannounced
Last September, in the season when nights are cool but days
still mellow, and gardens are old and rich and ready for an active
retirement before senility and death (and who can say in which
hour they will strike), the cleaning woman came lugging a large
bucket. She brought it, she said, “because I know you love
turtles.” At the bottom of the bucket, in a few inches of water,
was a large greenish disk. Eva had been fishing in a lake in
southern Indiana and the turtle had hooked himself on her
worm-baited line. She took it back to the apartment in Chicago
and her daughters had amused themselves with it, and fed it
worms, she said, and now she brought it to me. I could guess
why.
The object in the bucket looked like an olive drab pita bread,
about six and one half inches in diameter, and rimmed in creamy
yellow. A black line was hand drawn with an ink brush just
inside the circumference. The same brush had drawn black o’s
in the middle diminishing to small dots and dashes near the
edge. A real, live, softshell.
Firsthand observation of softshells had been limited to some
juveniles at CHS meetings and a distant view of snorkels and
beady eyes in Florida waters. There were overheard conversa-
tions on how mean-tempered they are, how long the neck and
sharp the jaw, how very aquatic, so that tissues absorbed oxygen
directly from the water to supplement air breathing; also that
they are best kept alone, other turtles might injure them, that
they like to burrow into the bottom, covering their backs with
mud or sand, sticking out their long-necked heads to grab prey
or breathe.
I did know personally, in all verity, that adult aquatic turtles
take a big tank and are very dirty.
“I’ll want my bucket back,” Eva said.
I asked if there were any more fishing trips to Indiana this
year. Alas, no.
In the yard is a long galvanized tub partly full of water, and
containing a clay drain tile propped with heavy bricks. On sunny
days we brought out a juvenile wood turtle to stretch his legs,
get sun, and improve his mind with new experience. The tile
was a cool shelter. (An outdoor tub is a good place to feed
minnows because the stinky remains can be easily hosed away.)
Woodie was always taken in before evening for fear of raccoons.
Raccoons had mauled an adult painted turtle left out one sum-
mer night and left her bleeding on the lawn. Nevertheless, that
big softshell could not go in a ten-gallon tank, the only other
accommodation with immediate occupancy. So, we carried the
bucket and contents over to the tub. When I picked up the disk
the back was rough as sandpaper but the underside was unex-
pectedly slick and slippery. Legs and head jerked out and the
turtle flew into the tub, apparently unhurt, and glared up at me
from a weird little snorkel-tipped head. Then he hid in the drain
tile. Raccoons did not bother him.
There was a CHS meeting next evening, so I took him along
(in my own bucket) for an inspection by the turtle-elders and to
confirm identification as male eastern spiny softshell, Trionyx
spinifera. One maven, my favorite patient maven, demonstrated
the cleverest method for inspection of a turtle’s jaw. First, annoy
its head until it bites a finger and hangs on. Then, by moving the
finger around, one can scrutinize parts of the mouth and jaw.
When the turtle is tired it lets go. This simple but valuable idea
can be extrapolated for other occasions of natural observation.
(Perhaps one should take care not to exceed tissue tolerance of
the experimenter. Even if the possessor of the finger, foot, head,
or whatever is not the observer, screaming and writhing might
obscure accurate data-taking.)
You may read about the great length of a softshell’s neck.
How more impressive to see it stretching around for a nip as it is
held! Another maven taught me to hold it by the rear leg open-
ings. You have to catch it first. Fortunately, although Snork
feared and detested human contact he put more energy into
flying than biting.
He spent several weeks in the outdoor tub and appeared to
eat nothing. Hastily we caulked up an old 15-gallon tank, fitted
it with a waterfall type filter, and brought Snork indoors. For
one day he freaked out, rushing around trying to climb out of the
tank. If it was too full of water he flew out. If a haul-out was
provided he flew out. As he didn’t, contrary to appearance, sail
like a frisbee, the tank was kept on the floor. Then he settled
into a state of inactivity. He remained near the bottom, rarely
sticking up his snorkel and pulsing his neck under the fast
flowing current of falling water. He ate nothing. After a month
of this I consulted a turtle-elder about the problem. We dis-
cussed water temperature. The unheated water was the tempera-
ture of the air in the house, about 68–72EF. Warm it up to mid
80s was the suggestion. How strange it seems in winter, to heat
up a temperate climate wild animal to a degree uncomfortable to
me! True, if I were naked and wet 84 would be more comfort-
able than 68. Yet, it’s doubtful the rise in temperature would
stimulate my appetite for worms so perhaps the analogy doesn’t
hold. Has anyone tried putting little wool sweaters on turtles?
Imagine the collar!
By this time we had acquired a 20-gallon tank and gradually
warmed it to 84EF. After a week of warm temperature the animal
came alive. Now Snork could be observed swimming and feed-
ing. He entranced us and every visitor with his weird beauty.
The smooth crusted pita bread body appears slit at opposite
sides, head and forelegs inserted in the front end, rear legs and
22
thick tail in back --- a turtle sandwich. The streamlined small
head has a slender tubular pig snout with two piggy holes in the
end, light colored, flexible and probing. He stuck it into all the
corners and walls of the tank, rubbing it along the glass till it
glowed pink. The eyes are yellow, round, small and high, with
an dark dot in the center. They shift rapidly back and forth,
staring, nervous, apprehensive. A pair of double black stripes,
filled with gold, lead back from the top of the snout through the
eyes. The snaky neck is legendary for extending the snorkel to
the surface, but my favorite neck maneuver is “periscope up,”
when the head angles to get the eyes above water without point-
ing the snout straight up. Then scan left, scan right, submerge.
When the neck extends, the shell behind it hikes up like the stiff
tapestry collar of a bishop’s cope.
The front and back legs, all mottled in gold and black, are a
mass of voluminous wrinkles and folds that unfurl as paddles,
the rear legs especially wide when opened for hovering. No
wonder he flies so well. Each leg is tipped by ivory claws that
can be strongly deployed. In his short stay in the fifteen-gallon
tank he scrabbled out all the inner bead of caulking. Gravel and
sand had been put in as substrate, but it was so hurled about the
filters were ruined. The claws also give good purchase in human
skin preparatory for flying take-off.
The tail, like the head, has a pair of double stripes. This male
turtle has a special secret weirdness --- an almost black copula-
tory organ, thick and half as long as he is, and shaped in a burst
of ragged points at the end. He modestly would evert this organ
from his tail only when he believed himself alone. If he caught
sight of a voyeur it disappeared magically, the genie back into
the bottle.
Even his plastron is strange, slippery as oiled teflon. It is
translucent and blood vessels show through it.
When he wishes he can pull in legs and head and tuck the tail
sideways for the “disk look.” A front view shows mottled wrin-
kles with a central circle of folds surrounding two snout holes.
Snork ate prodigiously of vitamin-fortified mealworms,
minnows, and earthworms. He liked poultry liver and had turkey
liver for Thanksgiving. He fouled his water, also prodigiously.
Filtering was insufficient. We changed half the water once a
week but the water grew cloudy and slimy. Even after complete
changes it would cloud in one week. Unpleasant whitish circles
appeared on his back, first faintly then more pronounced. Dark
spots formed on the back of his neck and blackened rims on his
feet. Worst of all, he tried desperately to fly out of his tank,
something not done since the first hectic day indoors. It soon
became obvious that the white circles were open sores. Dry him
a while, I thought. Less than a day dry left him shriveled and
miserable, so we tried shallow water with the back exposed. A
water mark appeared with a shrivelled area where it had been
dry. Enough - off to the vet to treat and correct whatever was
wrong. Antibiotic was injected and applied. It seems this very
aquatic turtle needs to bask. He always had a vitalite, but we
never could figure out how to put a basking place in the tank
without the flying turtle effect. We had to roll up sleeves, grab
turtle, and put him in a separate dry tank lined with newspaper,
for basking under a warm incandescent lamp (and vitalite too for
good measure). After an hour he was hidden under the newspa-
per. We always set a timer to avoid cooking turtle en papillote.
At first this was done daily, then every two–three days.
It also seems that softshells are very sensitive to pH of the
water and my Evanston tapwater is too alkaline. Acidity and salt
were gradually added using a husbandry information sheet and
water testing kit. These adjustments must be redone with any
water change, which schedule has been complete change,
washed tank, once a month. Oh, those siphons, buckets, and
puddles!
On this regime Snork now looks lovely, the sore and black
areas healed (with lots of sloughing) and only a faint circular
water line remains on his back. As a result of so much handling
he is less wild and will eat when someone is looking. He’ll even
take a choice bit off the end of a forceps. It is still apparent,
though, that he detests people and captivity --- and this particular
person detests his demanding health requirements. Snork will be
repatriated through the CHS Bureau of Immigration, to a quiet
lake where, one hopes, fishermen will not often tempt him.
There he will be free of grabbing hands and prying eyes.
Meanwhile, Eva still cleans for us, so watch this space.
23
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):24-25, 2013
What You Missed at the January Meeting
John [email protected]
Ray Pawley is a man who needs no introduc-
tion . . . unless you’re young, not interested in
herps, have no association with zoos in the last
several decades, were not a member of the
Chicago Herpetological Society at its genesis,
have had no association with your society for
several decades, have not attended any of the
multiple meetings where he has been a guest
speaker, or have not read any of the articles I
kludged together about those meetings. So I’m
going to introduce him again (reintroduce?) for
the few of you out there that may fall under any
of those categories. Not that I’m casting stones
here. Well, it is a sin not to be reading my articles, but there are
certainly very reasonable explanations why someone who is
reading this might not know the name of Ray Pawley. Few of
them, but they do exist.
After years of keeper and curatorial work at Lincoln Park
Zoo and Brookfield Zoo, Ray has now retired to New Mexico,
but ties to this area still bring him to Chicago where we take
advantage and have him disseminate some of the immense
knowledge that he’s acquired. Among all of his other accom-
plishments, he managed to be a force in the establishment of
your society and served as president multiple times. Not that I’m
trying to date Ray, but he was keeping reptiles and amphibians,
along with mammals and birds, when little was known of hus-
bandry for most animals. For a little while at February’s meeting
he allowed us a glimpse of some of the trials of those years and
some of the lessons learned. In the aviation industry when a
group of pilots sit around swapping stories they call it hangar
flying. New pilots or even not-so-new pilots glean valuable
information from those sessions. Ray gave us a little taste of
hangar flying for those of us keeping herps. Much to my cha-
grin, I was unable to attend, but Josh Baity was nice enough to
record the presentation and I am happy to give you an idea of
what went on.
Ray began by claiming he might be the kiss of death for
reptile houses, seeing as Lincoln Park Zoo has now closed the
reptile house he worked in there, and soon after he retired from
the Brookfield Zoo that reptile house also closed. To the laugh-
ter of his audience he refused to ever work for Rob Carmichael
because, as the last reptile-concentrated facility in the area, he
didn’t want the Wildlife Discovery Center to close. He also said
that he would stick to his notes or he would be talking until
midnight.
He emphasized the greater flexibility that individuals have
over zoo curators, who have to satisfy the demands of not only
the animals, but also the public and the administration. The
interaction of these three claimants often obstructed the best
solutions, but Ray did the best he could with what he had. The
Brookfield reptile house was designed in the 1920s when the
state-of-the-art thinking was reptiles needed only a water bowl
and the habitat was to be dry. By the ’60s humidity was a major
player in reptile husbandry and Ray talked of
being stuck with a building that had inade-
quate heat, no air conditioning, no humidifier,
and minimal electrical outlets. In the winter it
was too cold and in the summer it was too hot.
Ray remembers using cold packs for the ani-
mals as crowds of visitors toured the house
with sweat dripping from their noses in the
hundred-degree building.
Ray would admonish his staff never to
surprise him. An administrator broke that rule
when, after hearing that the reptile house need-
ed humidity, had a humidifier installed without consulting Ray.
Within two weeks the animals were developing skin blisters, the
plaster walls were melting, and Ray was forced to combat the
added humidity. Good intentions can have poor outcomes.
Ray’s rule of thumb for what constitutes a good representa-
tion of reptile species involves about a hundred different spe-
cies. In a house designed with only sixty exhibits, he had to
experiment with multiple animals in the same cage. After poor
results caging closely related species, they hit upon the success-
ful tactic of housing unrelated species that needed the same
habitat and wouldn’t compete for the same resources. Combin-
ing turtles and snakes and other vastly different species allowed
him to boost the number of species displayed to 120, covering
all major orders of reptiles except the tuataras, which Ray
claimed were not a particularly charismatic order anyway.
But making an appealing attraction for the public meant
introducing more than just reptiles, and Ray introduced small
mammals and birds to the reptile house. Marmosets would run
along the guardrails, enough at home that they actually bred,
and touracos would careen through the visitors as the African
birds flew from one exhibit to another. And most of us who
visited that reptile house remember what Ray said was the most
popular exhibit, the Madagascar hissing cockroaches.
Brookfield’s success at having long-lived animals across all
species Ray attributes to his staff always listening to the ani-
mals. He pointed out that not everything written on care is
accurate nor do the animals read the books. While literature
research is important, it’s more important to put egos aside,
consult with keepers, pool opinions, and watch the animals.
Setting up protocols is absolutely necessary, but Brookfield was
constantly updating and changing procedures based on what was
learned from the animals. A good lesson for those of us who are
keepers, but Ray stressed that changes to actions that have
worked in the past should be carried out conservatively.
In a zoo setting, Ray refrained from making the animals pets.
Animals were encouraged to own their cages. Handling was
kept to a minimum and was always negotiated with the animal.
Rather than grabbing an animal to relocate it, a snake hook
might be used to gently displace the animal while the cage was
being cleaned, always with the goal of minimizing stress. Cage
Ray Pawley. Photograph by Dick Buchholz.
24
furniture was always replaced in the same spot. And Ray made a
case for not sterilizing everything in the cage, but allowing
ordinary bacteria to aid the animals’ immune responses and
digestion. Clean is OK; sterile probably not needed and poten-
tially harmful.
To illustrate his concept of listening to animals by attempt-
ing to understand how they perceive the world, Ray used the
arrival of a seven-foot-long fer-de-lance (Bothrops asper). For a
year the animal, while not appearing distressed, refused to eat.
Ray, thinking of a snake’s ability to receive infrasound and
realizing that the hundreds of zoo visitors traipsing through the
reptile house eight hours a day would certainly have an impact,
put a sponge-rubber pad under the animal’s favorite resting spot.
The next day the snake ate. The snake lived for 17 years.
Ray also highlighted that many husbandry solutions are
counterintuitive. Water snakes in captivity seem to prefer a dry
environment with a water dish whereas many desert species
need moisture such as a hide box with a moist sponge. Ventila-
tion is good, but not breezy conditions. Vents at the top and
bottom of the cage are best, and Ray touted the value of simple
solutions, such as plastic wrap covering part of the vents as a
simple way to raise humidity in an otherwise too dry cage.
Fogging or misting is probably valuable for all animals, though
frequency is dependent on the species.
Ray credited captive-bred animals for a greater resistance to
some of the maladies that curators used to have to fight. A quick
survey revealed that not one of the keepers in his audience had
trouble with mouth rot or pneumonia. The Brookfield zoo would
run the splayed heads and tails of shed skins through a copier
machine as a record of an animal’s health, but would dispose of
the shed to prevent the possibility of spreading disease. An
interesting technique and something I might try.
Ray’s theory on pyramiding in tortoises gives more credence
to heat problems than too much protein. He says that a heat
“sandwich,” with even heat sources from above and below, kept
pyramiding to a minimum in Brookfield’s tortoises. His presen-
tation was ended with a lively discussion of the possible func-
tions of the lymphatic system in reptiles.
And that discussion was probably a glimpse into Ray’s style
of management when it comes to captive animals. He encour-
ages debate, tries to learn from the animals in his care and the
people doing the caring, and adapts when he sees a need. If we
as keepers take nothing else from his talk, we’ll be better for
following those ideas. A chance to indulge in decades of experi-
ence with keeping reptiles and amphibians, that’s why I wish I
were at the meeting. That’s one reason I belong to the Chicago
Herpetological Society.
25
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):26-28, 2013
Herpetology 2013
In this column the editorial staff presents short abstracts of herpetological articles we have found of interest. This is not an attempt
to summarize all of the research papers being published; it is an attempt to increase the reader’s awareness of what herpetologists
have been doing and publishing. The editor assumes full responsibility for any errors or misleading statements.
MAMUSHI ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION
K. Sasaki et al. [2012, J. Herpetology 46(4):689-695] note that
the Japanese mamushi (Gloydius blomhoffii) has long been
exploited for its medicinal value. They studied this snake’s
reproductive ecology on Hokkaido and assessed its vulnerabil-
ity. They marked 299 individuals from 1999–2002 and kept 29
pregnant females in captivity until parturition. Pregnant females
aggregated at gestation sites during summer and fall until just
before parturition. Behavior suggestive of mating seasons was
evident mostly in August and September. As expected, there was
an apparent sex difference in body size in adults but not in
neonates: females were larger than males. Consistent with previ-
ous reports, both neonates and adults were larger in Hokkaido
than in southern Japan. The smallest pregnant female measured
44.8 cm in snout–vent length, which was larger than values
reported from southern regions. Offspring sex ratio was statisti-
cally equal: 88 males to 105 females. Litter size averaged 6.6
offspring. Longer females tended to produce larger litters and
longer neonates. The proportion of pregnant to non-pregnant
females, coupled with mark–recapture data, suggested that
mamushi females skip one or more years between reproductive
bouts. Relative litter mass (RCM) was large (83% on average),
and postpartum body condition was lower, especially so in
females with larger RCM. Direct human-caused mortality was
highest for pregnant females (70.2%), followed by non-pregnant
females and then males. High adult mortality, particularly of
pregnant females, raises a concern about population persistence,
because mamushi exhibit a slow life history. The tendency of
pregnant females to aggregate at predictable locations further
makes mamushi populations vulnerable to human killing and
exploitation.
MALE VOCAL RESPONSES CHANGED BY EARLY
EXPERIENCE
B. Dawson and M. J. Ryan [2012, Copeia 2012(4):678-682]
note that the acquisition of signals used in intrasexual communi-
cation is not well studied. To better understand the possible
contribution of early experience to the acquisition of intrasexual
responses, the authors reared Neotropical túngara frogs, Physa-
laemus pustulosus, in four acoustic environments: 1) conspecific
chorus, 2) heterospecific chorus, 3) acoustic isolation, and 4)
noise. For the heterospecific chorus, they chose the calls of a
congener, P. enesefae, with which P. pustulosus is sympatric in
parts of its distribution. They measured the evoked vocal re-
sponses (EVR) of these frogs in response to calls of the con-
specifics, to calls of the congener, and to calls representing an
intermediate between the two species. Male P. pustulosus reared
hearing the calls of P. enesefae produced more calls overall and
more complex calls in response to the call of P. enesefae. This is
consistent with the hypothesis that the EVR of male anurans can
be influenced by early experience and is the product of an inter-
action between genes and the environment.
SOUTH AMERICAN DWARF BOAS
F. F. Curcio et al. [2012, Herpetological Monographs 26:
80-121] report that a taxonomic study on the South American
dwarf boas of the genus Tropidophis revealed the existence of
two new species in the Atlantic Forest biome. As a result, they
recognize five mainland species, three in the Atlantic Forest and
two in northwestern South America. Based on general distribu-
tion and morphological orientation, the type locality of T. pauci-
squamis is restricted to Estação Biológica de Boracéia, munici-
pality of Salesópolis, state of São Paulo, Brazil; furthermore, a
lectotype for T. taczanowskyi is designated. The authors provide
data on the hemipenial morphology of two South American
Tropidophis, showing that the quadrifurcate condition described
for West Indian taxa also occurs in mainland congeners. The
distributions of the three Atlantic Forest species are congruent
with patterns of diversification of other vertebrate taxa associ-
ated with cold climates prevalent at high elevations. Refugial
isolation and riverine barriers may account for such speciation
events.
REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF A GLASS FROG
A. Valencia-Aguilar et al. [2012, Copeia 2012(4):722-731]
describe for the first time aspects of the reproductive ecology
and behavior of a population of Hyalinobatrachium aureo-
guttatum located in the Colombian Pacific lowlands. Males
vocalize and attend clutches from the underside of leaves over-
hanging the streams. Males showed high fidelity to their terri-
tory; each male repeatedly uses the same leaf for perching,
calling, mating, and clutch attendance. There were no significant
differences in the environmental variables registered for the
microhabitats where males were located with or without
clutches, with one or multiple clutches, or between successful or
unsuccessful clutches, which suggest that the analyzed variables
are not important for the obtention of the clutches and their
success. Males were found grouped in the study area at distances
varying between 0.3–0.5 m; thus, more than one male can be
observed occupying other leaves in the same plant. Fights or
aggressive behaviors were not observed in intrusion events by
co-specific males in the territory of the resident males; however,
the authors observed a series of movements that resulted in
moving the intruder further away. Females almost immediately
abandoned the clutches after oviposition, whereas most of the
time, at day and night, males stayed near, touching or sitting on
one to five egg clutches during most of their embryonic develop-
ment. This brooding behavior also included hydration, cleaning,
and defense of the eggs. Arthropod predation was observed in
both attended and abandoned egg clutches; however, in one
observation, the behavior of the male moved the predator away
and saved the clutch. These observations and the finding of
abandoned clutches that did not complete their development
suggest that male parental care increases embryo survival and, as
a result, his reproductive success.
26
MILKSNAKE FEEDING ECOLOGY
B. T. Hamilton et al. [2012, J. Herpetology 46(4):515-522]
examined the diet of the milksnake (Lampropeltis triangulum)
in the western United States and evaluated predictions about
ontogenetic shifts, sexual divergence, and geographic variation
in diet. Identifiable prey items were found in 139 specimens,
and 41 additional prey items were recorded from the literature,
for 180 prey items in total from 175 individual snakes. Lampro-
peltis triangulum is a generalist predator and feeds primarily on
lizards and mammals. Skinks made up a large portion of the
total diet. Other lizard taxa were also important prey, whereas
reptile eggs, snakes, and birds were consumed infrequently.
Ontogenetic shifts in diet were documented. The upper size limit
of prey increased with increasing snake size, and adult snakes
continued to feed on small prey. Prey type also was related to
snake size. Juveniles fed more frequently on lizards, but adults
fed mainly on mammals. Although males were longer than
females, there was no sexual size dimorphism in mass, and there
were no differences in diet between sexes. Diet varied geograph-
ically, and the proportion of endothermic prey was greater at
higher latitudes after accounting for snake size.
GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW DENSITIES
T. D. Castellón et al. [2012, Chelonian Conservation and Biol-
ogy 11(2):153-161] note that gopher tortoises (Gopherus poly-
phemus) occur in a variety of habitats, but are primarily associ-
ated with sandhill communities. In peninsular Florida, however,
mesic flatwoods make up the largest area of habitat, and scrub
often replaces sandhill on inland ridges. Tortoise ecology is
poorly understood in these habitats and few data are available to
guide management. The authors surveyed tortoise burrows and
assessed vegetation in scrub, flatwoods, and pine plantations on
flatwoods soils at Avon Park Air Force Range in south-central
Florida. Densities of noncollapsed burrows in scrub (1.93/ha)
and flatwoods/plantations (1.42/ha) were generally lower than is
typical for sandhill (3.25–9.95/ha), although total abundance
was high (>20,000) because of the large habitat area. In scrub,
low burrow densities may be due to low abundance of food
plants. Nonetheless, the burrow density in scrub was signifi-
cantly higher than in flatwoods/plantations, where food was
abundant but soils were poorly drained and burrows were often
flooded. The percentage of collapsed burrows was significantly
higher in scrub (53%) than in flatwoods/plantations (35%),
although a higher percentage of the remaining (noncollapsed)
burrows were active in scrub (23%) than in flatwoods/
plantations (16%). These patterns (and data from a subsequent
radiotelemetry study) suggest that tortoises in scrub maintain
strong fidelity to individual burrows, and frequently abandon
others, whereas tortoises in flatwoods share burrows and move
among them regularly, but rarely abandon them. This sharing
and continual reuse of available burrows suggests a possible
limitation on suitable conditions for burrow construction in
flatwoods, probably related to the high water table. Scrub and
flatwoods may constitute suboptimal habitats for gopher tor-
toises, due to low abundance of food in scrub and poorly
drained soils in flatwoods. Nonetheless, large numbers of tor-
toises may occupy scrub and flatwoods, necessitating better
understanding of their ecology in these habitats.
DENSITY AFFECTS GOPHER TORTOISE BEHAVIOR
C. Guyer et al. [2012, Herpetological Monographs 26:122-134]
compared patterns of burrow size, tortoise size, home range size
and overlap, movement distances, and mating rates among six
sites that differed in density of gopher tortoises (Gopherus poly-
phemus). Burrow sizes differed among sites because tortoise
size distributions differed among sites, but this was due princi-
pally to the unusually small size of animals on the Conecuh
National Forest site. A linear relationship between tortoise
density and burrow density was documented from the six sites,
suggesting that each tortoise, on average, created 2.5 burrows or
that the burrow-to-tortoise conversion factor for the sites was
0.40. The average distance from a burrow to its nearest three
neighbors was greater for low-density sites than for high-density
sites, indicating that animals probably were more isolated from
each other on sites with low tortoise densities. Home ranges
were larger in males than females, a feature documented in other
studies of tortoise movements. Home range sizes were greatest
for densities of approximately 0.4 tortoises/ha and decreased in
size above and below this density. This suggests that animals
moved to visit close neighbors in areas of high density, expand-
ed movements to maintain contact with neighbors that became
more widely dispersed as density decreased, and then restricted
movements to a few close neighbors as density reached extreme-
ly low levels. Home range overlap increased linearly with in-
creasing density, suggesting that opportunities for social interac-
tions decreased with decreasing density. When tortoises moved
between burrows, males moved longer distances than females
and tortoises of both sexes moved shorter distances on high-
density sites than did tortoises on low-density sites, suggesting
greater movement costs for males than females and for tortoises
on low-density sites. Males traveled up to 500 m to visit female
burrows, but most movements were < 80 m. Median movement
distances of males to visit females were negatively correlated
with burrow density, suggesting that cost of male movements to
find mates increased as population density decreased. Based
upon patterns of 95% confidence limits, rates of mountings of
female tortoises approached zero when females occupied bur-
rows approximately 200 m from neighboring burrows. If bur-
rows were uniformly distributed 200 m apart, then reproductive
failure would be a statistically supportable outcome at a density
of 0.3 burrows/ha (0.12 tortoises/ha). These values are similar to
the values of 0.4 tortoises/ha (1.0 burrows/ha) that the data
suggest is the density at which social structure associated with
movements within home ranges are altered.
RADIATED TORTOISES AS BUSH MEAT
R. C. J. Walker, and T. H. Rafeliarisoa [2012, Chelonian Con-
servation and Biology 11(2):223-226] report that radiated tor-
toises (Astrochelys radiata) are facing a significant extinction
risk within the next few decades as a direct result of the increas-
ing popularity of the species as bush meat. Sampling across the
species range revealed a mean carcass encounter rate of 2.2/km
of transect, with highest levels of poaching within the Linta and
Menarandra river regions. No poaching was recorded within the
2 protected areas within the core of the species range. Improved
local law enforcement, in addition to community-based conser-
vation initiatives, is critical to combating this crisis.
27
EFFECTS OF CRAYFISH ON TADPOLES
M. J. Davis et al. [2012, J. Herpetology 46(4):527-534] note that
habitat structure is known to influence community interactions,
but its role in amphibian communities is unclear. The authors
examined the effect of vegetative habitat structure, in the pres-
ence or absence of a crayfish predator (Orconectes rusticus) and
the herbicide atrazine, on green frog (Rana clamitans) tadpoles
reared in 10-l microcosms in the laboratory. Crayfish predators
reduced green frog survival and affected activity levels and micro-
habitat use differently depending on the presence or absence of
vegetation. In treatments with vegetation, activity levels were
greater when the crayfish predator was absent, but in treatments
without vegetation activity levels did not differ between predation
treatments. Moreover, when a crayfish predator was present, tad-
poles in treatments without vegetation spent more time at the
water surface than tadpoles in treatments with vegetation. This
preference for the water surface may have been a compensatory
behavioral change to avoid predation because it was less likely
that crayfish would be able to reach the upper portion of the
tank in the absence of vegetation. Atrazine exposure did not
significantly influence susceptibility of green frog tadpoles to
crayfish predators or alter the impact of vegetation. The authors
found that vegetative habitat structure can mediate predator–
prey interactions. Contrary to previous studies they found that
the presence of vegetation may benefit the crayfish predator and
result in both lethal and sublethal effects on tadpole prey.
NEST PREDATION ON MAP TURTLES IN WISCONSIN
G. A. Geller [2012, Chelonian Conservation and Biology 11(2):
197-205] obtained incidental observations on nest predation
dynamics at 2 map turtle (Graptemys spp.) nesting sites along
the Wisconsin River, Iowa County, Wisconsin, during primary
research on the use of electric fencing to decrease turtle nest
predation. Sites were continuously monitored by digital trail
cameras during the 2008–2011 reproductive seasons. Raccoons
(Procyon lotor) displayed temporally focused turtle nest foraging
efforts across both sites and years and were the only confirmed
nest predators. Striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis), Virginia
opossums (Didelphis virginiana), coyotes (Canis latrans), and
American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) were less frequent on
site but also displayed recurring seasonal chronologies. Nest
predation levels exceeded 90%, with short nest survival time-
lines suggesting relatively high predation pressures on these sites.
THE TURTLES OF BHUTAN
J. T. Wangyal et al. [2012, Chelonian Conservation and Biology
11(2):268-272] present the first report on the turtles of the Hima-
layan Kingdom of Bhutan. They found five turtle species: Cuora
amboinensis, C. mouhotii, Cyclemys gemeli, Melanochelys tri-
carinata, and Indotestudo elongata,. The record of C. mouhotii
is a significant range extension to the west; that of C. amboinen-
sis is a range extension from adjacent northeast India; and those
of C. gemeli, M. tricarinata, and I. elongata fill geographic gaps
in their known distributions. An analysis of distributions of
other turtle species in adjacent eastern Nepal and northeast India
suggests that additional country records of turtles may be found
in Bhutan, especially in the southern lowlands of the country.
USE OF HIBERNACULA BY PINESNAKES
J. Burger et al. [2012, J. Herpetology 46(4):596-601] note that
understanding the specific habitat requirements of reptiles during
different life stages or seasons is critical to conserving viable
populations. Northern pinesnakes (Pituophis melanoleucus) are
one of the few species that spend the winter in underground
hibernacula that they excavate themselves. The authors report on
26 years (1986–2011) of monitoring pinesnake use at seven
hibernacula in the New Jersey Pine Barrens. The goal was to
determine the frequency of repeated use, number of snakes
present by year, disruptions of hibernacula, and the relationship
between number of snakes present and the probability of occu-
pancy of each hibernaculum in successive years. The overall
goal was to determine the importance of protecting known
hibernation sites regardless of whether they appear occupied in a
given season. These data suggest that, if no snakes are observed
entering a particular hibernaculum over a limited time period, it
does not mean none are there or that none will use it in succes-
sive years. The variability in use suggests not only that predation
and human disturbance can result in nonoccupancy the follow-
ing year but that environmental and temperature-related condi-
tions force snakes to have alternative hibernacula to reduce risk
and ensure survival. Pinesnakes are listed as threatened by the
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for many
reasons, including habitat loss. There is continued pressure from
developers to destroy habitat during development, including
critical hibernation sites. The long-term use of specific hiberna-
cula, even with periods of low or no use, suggests that these
resources should be protected to provide a matrix of available
overwintering sites.
CONSERVATION OF TURKS ISLAND BOAS
R. G. Reynolds and G. P. Gerber [2012, J. Herpetology 46(4):
578-586] note that the boid genus Epicrates contains 10 species
in the West Indies, several of which are listed as threatened or
endangered, whereas the status of the others remains unknown.
Little is known about Turks Island boas (Epicrates chrysogaster
chrysogaster), a subspecies of the Southern Bahamas boa en-
demic to the Turks and Caicos Islands. No published ecological
studies exist for this subspecies. A long history of human habita-
tion, greatly exacerbated by exponentially increasing develop-
ment in the last several decades, appears to be threatening the
remaining populations of these boas. However, a lack of basic
ecological information is holding back conservation efforts. The
authors report on the first multiyear ecological study of Turks
Island boas, focusing on an important population located on the
small island of Big Ambergris Cay in the southeastern margin of
the Caicos Bank. Encounter rates of up to 3.5 snakes per person-
hour make this population especially easy to study. They captured
249 snakes, 11 of which were recaptures. They provide basic
natural history information including size, color pattern, girth,
body temperature, abundance, diet, activity, diurnal refuge selec-
tion, and population size. They also clarify the known distribu-
tion and discuss the conservation concerns of this species. This
study fills a gap in the ecological knowledge of Bahamian boas
and will provide important baseline data for the Big Ambergris
Cay population of Turks Island Boas as this small island under-
goes extensive development over the next several decades.
28
Bull. Chicago Herp. Soc. 48(2):29, 2013
The Tympanum
Croc Fest
The 2012 Christmas Croc Fest, a fundraiser for
crocodilian conservation, took place on 08
December 2012 at Shawn and Jen Heflick’s
facility in Palm Bay, Florida, USA, raising a
record US$15,000 for critically endangered
Orinoco crocodiles. Croc Fest is an annual,
grass-roots fundraiser supported by private
individuals, businesses, and zoos, all with a common interest in
conserving crocodilians. The funds raised at this year’s event
will be directed to Asociación Chelonia, a Madrid-based NGO
that has made great progress in getting a comprehensive conser-
vation program underway for Orinoco crocodiles in Colombia.
100% of the funds donated go to the cause, as all event expenses
are covered by organizers Shawn Heflick, Flavio Morrissiey,
Colette Adams, and Curt Harbsmeier.
Croc Fest has evolved into a family-friendly event, and attracted
some 150 attendees who were treated to live animal displays and
presentations (courtesy of Gator Adventure Productions), live
music (courtesy of Daniel and Lisa Parker), BBQ (prepared
fresh, on site), libations, fishing, kayaking, a silent auction and
finally, a rousing live auction conducted by Joe Wasilewski and
Shawn. Event-goers were also treated to a tour of Shawn’s lab,
where scenes in episodes of Nat Geo Wild’s Python Hunters
have been filmed. Finally, Luis Sigler from Dallas World Aquar-
ium timed his delivery of two juvenile Orinoco crocodiles to
Shawn’s facility so that Croc Fest attendees could witness their
uncrating and see and study Orinoco crocodiles up close!
Rapport between Joe and Shawn made for a very entertaining
and profitable live auction. Everyone enjoyed great food and
camaraderie while bidding on unique items, including authentic
items from Colombia (provided by Asociación Chelonia), and
items donated by zoos, businesses and individuals throughout
Florida and other parts of the country.
We thank all of the individuals, businesses and zoos which
supported this fundraising event.
About the Supported Conservation Program
Commercial hunting of the Orinoco crocodile began around
1929, and from that time to 1960, it is estimated that between 2
and 4 million crocodiles were killed in both Venezuela and
Colombia. Until very recently, parts of Colombia have not been
safe for western scientists. For this reason, less is known about
the actual status of Orinoco crocodiles in the wild in Colombia
versus Venezuela. Surveys now reveal that the total wild popu-
lation of Orinoco crocodiles in Colombia is possibly as low as
130 adult animals, down from an estimated 780 in 1974–1975.
That is why Asociación Chelonia’s work is
so important now.
The majority of the remaining population of
this species in Colombia is located in the
area where the work of Asociación Chelonia
is taking place. Its program, initiated in
2010, began with surveys of the wild popula-
tion in conjunction with evaluation of the
crocodiles’ ecosystems. With much of the groundwork for this
project already laid, its proposed activities over the next two
years include the following:
• Identify an adequate site for a headstart and release program,
with accessibility for follow-up and enforcement of protection
laws in mind
• Work with landowners to create a private reserve for a pilot
reintroduction program
• Continue to conduct local and national education campaigns,
including the development of web pages for children, educators
and biologists
• Develop publications on the 6 species of crocodilians in
Colombia and distribute these free-of-charge to educational,
environmental and conservation-based entities
The budget that has been developed to conduct these activities is
US$194,404.00. Not including the proceeds of Christmas Croc
Fest 2012, over $120,000.00 has already been raised with sup-
port from such organizations as the Endowment Fund for Bio-
diversity (France), the Biodiversity Foundation (Spain), and
ANP --- Natural Protected Areas --- in Colombia.
About Asociación Chelonia
Dedicated to the creation of scientific conservation partnerships
for sustainable human development and the conservation of
nature, Asociación Chelonia was formed in 1997 by the Stu-
dents of Biological Sciences, Madrid. It is established at ten
sites within Spanish territories and has permanent offices in six
other countries. In addition to its work with Orinoco crocodiles
in Colombia, its focus areas include amphibian decline, climate
change and sea turtle conservation. In 2010, Asociación
Chelonia entered into a five-year cooperative agreement with
Corporinoquia (the government environmental authority in
Colombia) to work together on Orinoco Crocodile Conserva-
tion. Additionally, this first-ever targeted-release program was
included as one action item in the 1998–2008 National Program
for the Conservation of Orinoco Crocodiles in Colombia.
Curt L. Harbsmeier, Harbsmeier DeZayas, LLP, 5116 S.
Lakeland Drive, Lakeland, FL 33813
29
Unofficial Minutes of the CHS Board Meeting, January 18, 2013
The meeting was called to order at 7:47 P.M. at the Schaumburg
Public Library. Board members Lawrence Huddleston and Jenny
Vollman were absent.
Officers’ Reports
Recording Secretary: In Jenny’s absence Mike Dloogatch read
the minutes of the December 14, 2012, board meeting and they
were accepted.
Treasurer: Andy Malawy presented the December financial
report..
Membership Secretary: Mike read the list of expiring member-
ships and said we are steady at around 500 members.
Sergeant-at-arms: Jim Foster counted 28 people at the December
meeting.
Committee Reports
Shows:
• Notebaert Nature Museum, first full weekend of each month.
Josh Chernoff is coordinator.
• Chinese New Year, Garfield Park Conservatory, January 19.
• Nature on Tap, Notebaert Nature Museum, 5:30 P.M., January
22.
• Chicago Outdoor Sports Show, Donald E. Stephens Conven-
tion Center, Rosemont, January 23–27
• Repticon, Kane County Fairgrounds Prairie Event Center, St.
Charles, January 26–27
• Great Lakes Pet Expo, Wisconsin Exposition Center, Milwau-
kee, February 2.
• Winter Fest, Hidden Oaks Nature Center, 11 A.M. – 3 P.M.,
February 16
• Kids Expo, Schaumburg Convention Center, March 9–10
March 10: Reptile Rampage in Lake Forest
• Chicagoland Family Pet Expo, Arlington Park Racecourse,
March 15–17, 2013.
Old Business
Banners: Mike Scott suggested that any new banners should be
no more than about 5' wide, so that they fit more neatly behind a
6' table.
The Grants Committee will meet on February 10 at the home of
Steve and Amy Sullivan in Brookfield.
Junior Herpers club: The board discussed possibilities for
advertising the club.
New Business
Theresa Savino reported that the CHS needs a new laptop for
keeping track of the library. Cindy moved to allocate $700 to get
two new laptops, Josh seconded. The motion passed with all in
favor. Theresa will look for two new laptops, one a base model
and one a nicer model.
Aaron LaForge volunteered to look into the cost of a new pro-
jector.
David Hoff can set up a library website which would cost $25
for life and list the library contents online.
Josh Baity will look into prices for lapel microphones.
Round Table
.Cindy was mad that there was snow on the ground in Los
Angeles and she could not wear her flip-flops.
Josh has an Amazon treeboa that he hopes is giving birth during
the meeting.
John’s daughter Grace had an interview at U of I Vet School.
Theresa said that her daughter Molly has a friend is making a
video on their iguana.
Linda found out that Ilene Sievert passed away peacefully at
home on December 17, 2012, of cancer. Mike plans to republish
some of the essays that Ilene wrote over the years for the Bulle-
tin.
Stephanie is going to Sanibel Island, Florida, in March to do
field research on gopher tortoises.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:04 P.M.
Respectfully submitted for the recording secretary by Stephanie
Cappiello
30
AdvertisementsFor sale: rats and mice --- pinkies, fuzzies and adults. Quantity discounts. Please send a SASE for pricelist or call Bill Brant, THE GOURMET RODENT, PO Box 430, Newberry, FL 32669-0430, 352-472-9189, E-mail: [email protected].
For sale: highest quality frozen rodents. I have been raising rodents for over 30 years and can supply you with the highest quality mice available in the U.S.These are always exceptionally clean and healthy with no urine odor or mixed in bedding. I feed these to my own reptile collection exclusively and so makesure they are the best available. All rodents are produced from my personal breeding colony and are fed exceptional high protein, low fat rodent diets; no dogfood is ever used. Additionally, all mice are flash frozen and are separate in the bag, not frozen together. I also have ultra low shipping prices to most areas ofthe U.S. and can beat others shipping prices considerably. I specialize in the smaller mice sizes and currently have the following four sizes available: Smallpink mice (1 day old --- 1 gm) , $25 /100; Large pink mice (4 to 5 days old --- 2 to 3 gm), $27.50 /100; Small fuzzy mice (7 to 8 days old --- 5 to 6 gm) ,$30/100; Large fuzzy mice / hoppers (10 to 12 days old --- 8 to 10 gm), $35/100 Contact Kelly Haller at 785-234-3358 or by e-mail at [email protected]
For sale: High quality, all locally captive-hatched tortoises, all bred and hatched here in the upper midwest. Baby leopards, Sri Lankan stars, and pancakesusually available, and are all well-started and feeding great! Leopards are $125 ea., Sri Lankans (2012 hatched) $475 ea. And Pancakes are $195 ea. Leopardsfor out of state sale/shipping require a veterinary health certificate (inquire for cost). E-mail at [email protected] or call Jim or Kirsten at 262 654 6303.
Herp tours: Costa Rica herping adventures. Join a small group of fellow herpers for 7 herp-filled days. We find all types of herps, mammals, birds,andinsects, but our target is snakes. We average 52 per trip, and this is our 10th year doing it. If you would like to enjoy finding herps in the wild and sleep in abed at night with air-conditioning, hot water and only unpack your suitcase once, instead of daily, then this is the place to do it. Go to our web-site http://hiss-n-things.com and read the highlights of our trips. Read the statistics of each trip and visit the link showing photos of the 40 different species wehave found along the way. E-mail at [email protected] or call Jim Kavney, 305-664-2881.
Herpetological Researcher/Educator Internships: Research 4 Reptiles, LLC. is seeking two volunteer interns, ages 18 years and older, for the Summer 2013season to assist in all aspects of herpetological research and educational classes. Our mission is to provide challenging, hands-on, field-based programs forparticipants ages 12 years and older to inspire enthusiasm for and understanding of native Illinois reptile and amphibian species. All educational programsare taught entirely outdoors at Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in Wilmington, Illinois, and are limited to 8 participants. Internship details can be found onour website at: http://www.research4reptiles.biz. Email Holly Zak at [email protected] or call 630-337-0757 for questions.
Line ads in this publication are run free for CHS members --- $2 per line for nonmembers. Any ad may berefused at the discretion of the Editor. Submit ads to [email protected].
31
News and Announcements
2013 CHS GRANT RECIPIENTS
The CHS Grants Committee has chosen the CHS grant recipients for 2013. The committee consisted of John Archer,
Michael Dloogatch, Jim Foster, Jason Hood, Amy Sullivan and Steve Sullivan. This year we received 26 applications, as
usual exceeding the number of grants that could be awarded based on available funds. After a difficult decision process,
8 grants were awarded, in varying amounts, as follows:
• Iwo P. Gross, Eastern Illinois University (undergraduate).. “Assessing and Alleviating the Negative Effects of Vehicle
Access on a Snake Community within a State Park,” $1,000.
• Matthew L. Holding, Department of Evolution, Ecology and Organismal Biology, Ohio State University. “A Tale of
Two Traits: Do Coevolutionary Processes Shape the Venoms of Northern Pacific Rattlesnakes and Resistance Levels
of California Ground Squirrels?” $500.
• João Pedro Moura da Costa Maia, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos da Universidade
do Porto (Vairão, Portugal). “In Cold Blood: Community Ecology of Reptile Hemoparasites,” $1,000.
• Micah W. Perkins, Biology Department, University of Louisville. “Dietary Resource Partitioning among Watersnakes
in Northwestern Kentucky,” $1,000.
• Kimberly E. Schmidt, Cooperative Wildlife Research Laboratory, Southern Illinois University Carbondale. “Habitat
Selection of Ornate Box Turtles (Terrapene ornata ornata) within Restored and Remnant Tallgrass Prairie,” $!,000.
• Jaime Villacampa Ortega, Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain). “Changes in
Amphibian Assemblages along an Elevational Gradient at the Manu Biosphere Reserve, Southern Peru,” $500.
• Daniel B. Wylie, Illinois Natural History Survey. “Ongoing Health Assessment and Prevalence of Chrysosporium in
the Eastern Massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus catenatus),” $1,000.
• Michael L. Yuan, Cornell University (undergraduate). “Characterization of Cryptic Kin Structure in Gopher Tortoises
(Gopherus polyphemus) at Archbold Biological Station,” $1,000.
32
UPCOMING MEETINGS
The next meeting of the Chicago Herpetological Society will be held at 7:30 P.M., Wednesday, February 27, at the Peggy
Notebaert Nature Museum, Cannon Drive and Fullerton Parkway, in Chicago. The speaker will be Dustin Rhoads, author
of The Complete Suboc. Dusty will speak on his favorite topic, trans-Pecos ratsnakes, Bogertophis subocularis.
At the March 27 meeting Gerry Salmon of Boerne, Texas, will present a program on “Saving Herps --- One at a Time:
Working as a Timber Rattlesnake Monitor on the Tennessee Gas Pipeline in Northern New Jersey and Northeastern
Pennsylvania.” Gerry has been an avid naturalist for most of his 51 years. He has a strong interest in herpetology and
especially geographic distribution of North American reptiles and amphibians. He is also a long-term contributor to
northeastern timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus) field biology and conservation efforts that became the basis for a
recent seasonal job. His presentation consists of highlights of that work and is an opportunity to see some interesting herps
of the Northeast. Gerry has spoken several times in the past at our monthly meetings on kingsnakes of the mexicana
complex, timber rattlesnakes, and herping in South Carolina.
The regular monthly meetings of the Chicago Herpetological Society take place at Chicago’s newest museum --- the Peggy
Notebaert Nature Museum. This beautiful building is at Fullerton Parkway and Cannon Drive, directly across Fullerton
from the Lincoln Park Zoo. Meetings are held the last Wednesday of each month, from 7:30 P.M. through 9:30 P.M.
Parking is free on Cannon Drive. A plethora of CTA buses stop nearby.
Board of Directors MeetingAre you interested in how the decisions are made that determine how the Chicago Herpetological Society runs? And
would you like to have input into those decisions? If so, mark your calendar for the next board meeting, to be held at 7:30
P.M., March 15, in the adult meeting room on the second floor of the Schaumburg Township District Library, 130 S.
Roselle Road, Schaumburg..
The Chicago Turtle ClubThe monthly meetings of the Chicago Turtle Club are informal; questions, children and animals are welcome. Meetings
normally take place at the North Park Village Nature Center, 5801 N. Pulaski, in Chicago. Parking is free. For more info
visit the group’s Facebook page.
THE ADVENTURES OF SPOT
Periodicals PostagePaid at Chicago IL
CHICAGO HERPETOLOGICAL SOCIETYAffiliated with the Chicago Academy of Sciences
2430 North Cannon Drive • Chicago, Illinois 60614